Similar Datasets
Project description:Prognosis for cardiogenic shock patients under ECMO was our study goal. Success defined as survived more than 7 days after ECMO installation and failure died or had multiple organ failure in 7 days. Total 34 cases were enrolled, 17 success and 17 failure. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells collected at ECMO installation 0, 2 hours and removal were analyzed.
2024-10-15 | GSE182608 | GEO
Project description:Prognosis for cardiogenic shock patients under ECMO was our study goal. Success defined as survived more than 7 days after ECMO installation and failure died or had multiple organ failure in 7 days. Total 34 cases were enrolled, 17 success and 17 failure. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells collected at ECMO installation 0hr, 2hr and removal were used analyzed.
2024-10-15 | GSE182600 | GEO
Project description:Prognosis for cardiogenic shock patients under ECMO was our study goal. Success defined as survived more than 7 days after ECMO installation and failure died or had multiple organ failure in 7 days. Total 34 cases were enrolled, 17 success and 17 failure. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells collected at ECMO installation were used analyzed.
2019-12-31 | GSE93101 | GEO
Project description:Cardiogenic Shock Patients under Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
| PRJNA757005 | ENA
Project description:DNA Methylation of Cardiogenic Shock Patients under Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
| PRJNA757006 | ENA
Project description:Gene Expression of Cardiogenic Shock Patients under Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
| PRJNA756995 | ENA
Project description:Mortality in infarct-related cardiogenic shock (CS) remains high, reaching 40-50%. In refractory CS, active mechanical circulatory support devices including veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) are rapidly evolving. However, supporting evidence of VA-ECMO therapy in infarct-related CS is low. The current review aims to give an overview on the basics of VA-ECMO therapy, current evidence, ongoing trials, patient selection and potential complications.
| S-EPMC8910965 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStudies reporting long-term outcomes of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-treated coronary artery bypass grafting patients are scarce. The objective of this study was to examine the survival outcomes and identify mortality risk factors for coronary artery bypass grafting patients who received venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock.MethodsData from 121 consecutive venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-treated coronary artery bypass grafting patients at the Beijing Anzhen Hospital between January 2012 and December 2016 were analyzed. Multivariable Cox regression modeling was used to identify factors independently associated with 36-month mortality.ResultsSeventy-seven patients (64%) could be weaned from venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, 56 patients (46%) survived to hospital discharge, and 41 patients (34%) survived to 36 months. Older age (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.10; p < 0.001), left main coronary artery disease (hazard ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.04-2.59; p < 0.001), and vasoactive inotropic score (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.16; p = 0.011) were independent risk factors associated with 36-month mortality. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the logistic regression model, which was constructed with three pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation parameters-age ⩾ 60 years, left main coronary artery disease, and vasoactive inotropic score > 60-was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.81-0.94). Age and left main coronary artery disease significantly increased the discriminatory performance of Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment score (0.79 vs. 0.91, p = 0.025).ConclusionsOlder age, left main coronary artery disease, and vasoactive inotropic score were associated with 36-month mortality in coronary artery bypass grafting patients who received venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
| S-EPMC7686926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are effective tools in managing refractory cardiogenic shock (CS). Data comparing veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and IMPELLA® are however scarce. We aimed to assess outcomes of patients implanted with these two devices and eligible to both systems. From 2004 to 2020, we retrospectively analyzed 128 patients who underwent VA-ECMO or IMPELLA® in our institution for refractory left ventricle (LV) dominant CS. All patients were eligible to both systems: 97 patients were first implanted with VA-ECMO and 31 with IMPELLA®. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause death. VA-ECMO patients were younger (52 vs. 59.4, p = 0.006) and had a higher lactate level at baseline than those in the IMPELLA® group (6.84 vs. 3.03 mmol/L, p < 0.001). Duration of MCS was similar between groups (9.4 days vs. 6 days in the VA-ECMO and IMPELLA® groups respectively, p = 0.077). In unadjusted analysis, no significant difference was observed between groups in 30-day mortality: 43.3% vs. 58.1% in the VA-ECMO and IMPELLA® groups, respectively (p = 0.152). After adjustment, VA-ECMO was associated with a significant reduction in 30-day mortality (HR = 0.25, p = 0.004). A higher rate of MCS escalation was observed in the IMPELLA® group: 32.3% vs. 10.3% (p = 0.003). In patients eligible to either VA-ECMO or IMPELLA® for LV dominant refractory CS, VA-ECMO was associated with improved survival rate and a lower need for escalation.
| S-EPMC7918655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo review the outcomes of axillary artery (AX) and femoral artery (FA) cannulation for veno-arterial extracorporeal membraneous oxygenation (VA-ECMO).MethodsFrom 2009 to 2019, 371 patients who were supported with VA-ECMO for cardiogenic shock were compared based on the arterial cannulation site: AX (n = 218) versus FA (n = 153).ResultsPatients in the AX group were older (61 years vs 58 years, P = .011), had a greater prevalence of peripheral vascular disease (13.8% vs 5.2%, P = .008), and were less likely to have undergone cardiopulmonary resuscitation preoperatively (18.8% vs 36.6%, P < .001). Other characteristics were similar between groups, as were in-hospital outcomes, including survival to discharge (60.6% vs 56.9%), cerebrovascular accidents (12.4% vs 10.5%), cannulation-related bleeding (15.1% vs 17%), and length of VA-ECMO support (6 days). The incidence of leg ischemia (6.9% vs 15.7%, P = .006), limb ischemia related to VA-ECMO cannulation (0% vs 10.5%), the need to switch the cannulation site (4.6% vs 14.7%), and wound complications (WCs; 2.8% vs 15%) including infection and additional procedure were significantly greater in the FA group (P < .001). In multiple logistic regression analysis, FA cannulation and primary graft failure after heart transplantation were independent risk factors for cannulation-related WC. In subgroup analysis among patients with primary graft failure, WCs were more prevalent in FA cannulation (3.6% vs 39.1%, P = .001).ConclusionsAX cannulation for VA-ECMO is a safe and effective alternative to FA cannulation. It can be considered especially for patients with limited groin access, peripheral vascular disease, or for primary graft failure after heart transplant.
| S-EPMC8300043 | biostudies-literature